"''-'i ' 






E 449 
.P162 
Copy 1 



CORRESPv NDENCE 



BETWEtB 



NATHAN APPLETON 



A N D 



JOHN G. PALFREY 



T 



INTENDED AS A SUPPLEMENT TO MR. PALFREY'S 



PAMPHLET ON THE SLAVE POWER. 



« 1 



BOSTON: 

1 846, 

EASTBURN S PRESS. 




CORRESPONDENCE 



BETWEKN 



r 



Ky' 



NATHAN APPLETON 




AND 



JOHN G. PALFREY 



INTENDED AS A SUPPLEMENT TO MR. PALFREY'S 



PAMPHLET ON THE SLAVE POWER. 









BOSTON: 

1846. 

EASTBURN'S PRESS. 



.? \^ 



•V 



l4 



^- CORRESPONDENCE. 



NUMBER I. 

MR. APPLETON TO MR. PALFREY. 

Boston, 15th October, 1846. 
Dear Sir, 

You have published with your name a Pamphlet 
consisting of twenty-four numbers on the slave power, first 
published anonymously in the Boston Daily Whig, 

In this pamphlet you have given my name a particular 
prominence, devoting to it a large part of three different 
numbers. 

In your ninth mmiber you attribute to me the unenvi- 
able distinction of having caused the Mexican war. You 
speak of " surprising news from Boston." " Mr. Appleton 
and some of his friends had given their adhesion " (to the 
slave power.) " The news of the new movement reach- 
ing Washington." ''The game of opposition being up" 
by this ''demonstration of Mr. Appleton" coming "as 
unexpectedly as a thunder clap in a clear sky." 

No " thunder clap" could have taken me as much by 
surprise as did the perusal of this article. Any one read- 
ing it would suppose that I had been engaged in some 
deep intrigue, some strange plot against the peace of the 
country. Now the simple fact was, that I had received a 
letter signed by yourself and two other gentlemen to 
which you requested an answer. I did not choose to be 
guilty of the incivility of declining your request. I wrote 



4 

This ,vas my whole ac<i„n, ,„y whole den.o„stra,ion 
as you are pleased to call ,,. This letter you thought 
proper to publish, and ,t ,s to that pubheatL, that y u 
attribute such tremendous results. 

I wa^ at a loss whether to consider the whole thin^ 

article I thought .t due to a becoming self respect to set 
«.e read, „, ^,^„^, ^^ ^^ _^^=^^^ ageu'ey .r the 

wh w. "",7.^'='^ "'" '" *^' Papera communrcatiou 

".hug to let the matter rest, as the readers of the Whi- 
had my explanation before them ,n the same paper 

But the case is changed when yo„ publish those num- 
bers m a pamphlet, without this explanation or any Z- 
ftrence to it, and under the sanction of your name the 
origina charge fortified and commented on in two' a^ 
ditional numbers, in a manner to which I will „ appt 
the appropriate epithet. ^^^ 

It is evident that the circulation of the pamphlet under 
hese circumstances, ,s calculated to do me great ■ • '/ 
It affords no clue to the actual facts in the case. I th re 
foie ask of you, as an act of simple justice th„ „ n 

cause to be added to such of the pUhl^afs alfb: ^ 
c dated hereafter, an appendix, containing my letter of ^hl 
10.1. November, 1845, addressed to Mes rs. idams S. m 
ner and yourself, to which you attach s„ch imlt^Z' 
ogether with my letter to the Editor of the BoTto rDa dv 
VVhig, published in that paper on the 14th of lug t 
This will be but the work of a few hours and I Z I 
for granted you will see the propriety of k " 

i am not disposed to make any comtnent on the person-,!; 
.es,n which you have thought proper to indulge,' X he.: 
"1 the original or the expurgated edition Thn, 
much a matter of tTiie T, .™'"on. 1 hat is very 



the facts in the case may be fairly presented before them. 
There is nothing in either of the two letters which I ask 
you to publish which I wish to retract. 

I am sir, your very obedient servant, 

N. APPLETON. 

To John G. Palfrey, Esq,. 



The following are the letters referred to in the foregoing. 

NUMBER II. 

Boston, 10 November, 1845. 

Gentlemen : 

I have received a circular with your signatures, bear- 
ing date the 6th inst. asking my aid and cooperation in 
the measures taking by the Massachusetts Texas Commit- 
tee, and requesting an early answer. AVith this last request 
coming from gentlemen for whom I have the highest per- 
sonal respect, I feel bound in common courtesy to comply. 

I cannot however take part in this Texas movement. 
For all practical purposes, so far as the people are concern- 
ed I consider the question settled. I have opposed it, and 
contributed funds to oppose it, so long as there appeared 
to be any chance of preventing it. Massachusetts l:as 
done her duty, and her Senators and Representatives will 
continue to do theirs. Beyond that I cannot think it good 
policy to waste our energies in hopeless efforts upon the 
impossible. 

I observe amongst the parties to this movement, a great 
number, if not a majority of those who have distinguished 
themselves as members of the Abolition Party. 



Now I beheve our fathers did wisely in establishing the 
umon of the States under the existing constitution. It is 
at least questionable whether the Abolition movement is 
reconcilable with duty under that constitution. At any 
rate that movement as conducted was calculated, in my 
opinion to produce and has produced, nothing but evil. It 
has banded the South into a solid phalanx in resistance to 
What they consider an impertinent and unjustifiable inter- 
ference with their own peculiar rights and business. It has 
thus exasperated their feelings, and by its operation on 
their fears mcreased the severity of the slave laws. It has 
postponed the period of emancipation in the more northern 
slave states, which were fast ripening for that event. 

n/r n^f ''' ^ '''^^ ^''^°" '' ^'^' '^^'''^^ the election 
of Mr. Polk, and the admission of Texas into the Union 

I cannot sympathize with their cry of -Accursed be the 

coT."' r ' r"'' '"^ ''^'''' ^°"^^ ^^ ^^- -"timents 
CO ta ned m the documents enclosed to me. I cannot 
liiin.sh funds to aid in their dissemination. 
With much respect, I am, gentlemen, 

Your most obedient servant, 

rr .T ^- APPLETON. 

i Messrs. Charles F. Adams, 

John G. Palfrey, 

Charles Sumner. 

(T/Us letter ,cas sent under cover to Charles Su^nncr; Esq.) 



NUMBER Iff. 

From the Boston Daihj Whig Uth August, 1S46. 
To the Editor: — 

In tho Daily Wl.ig of 1st inst., I find n,y „„„« repeated through 
a column and an half of matter, the whole object of thich pnrporl 



to be, to make it appear that tliis humble individual was the cause 
of the removal of the United States troops from Corpus Christi to 
the Rio Grande, and of course of the war with Mexico. 

Heaven bless us ! Is this in joke or in earnest ? Is your face- 
tious correspondent indulging his fancy in a playful romance, or in 
brooding over the slave power and the evils of slavery has he 
himself falle» into bondage to one single idea ? I will not decide* 
The article is elaborately written, and has all the air and manner 
of sober belief. 

But what is the ground work for tliis hypothesis ? In Novem- 
ber last three gentlemen addressed to me a written communication,* 
with their signatures attached to it. They asked my co-operation 
in certain measures relating to the admission of Texas. They 
asked me to furnish funds for the circulation of certain printed 
addresses and circulars of which they enclosed me copies. 

At this time the act admitting Texas into the Union had passed 
both houses of Congress and become a law. The only condition 
was, that her Constitution should conform to the constitutional 
provision. 

In the mean tune a new Congress had been elected with an 
immense majority, as was well known, in favor of the admission of 
Texas. Under these circumstances, I considered the attempt to 
prevent the aimexation of Texas, by jietition, as futile as would be 
the attempt to roll back the current of the Mississippi. I was not 
disposed to be a party to it. 

Amongst the papers which I was asked to assist in circulating 
was an address intended to be sent to every clergyman in the 
country, urging them to devote one Sunday at least to the discus- 
sion of this political question. I could not think favorably of this 
proposal. But the contemptuous manner in which the constitution 
of the United States, the bond of our national union, was sneered 
at, in one of the circulars, gave me unmingled disgust. 

The gentlemen who addressed me the note were personal 
friends whom I highly esteemed. They requested me to give 
them an answer. In common courtesy I was bound to do so. I 
sent them the letter to Avhich your correspondent attaches such 
immense importance. I regretted to see my friends playing into 
the hands of the disunionists, the party whose political course luid» 

'This is not precisely correct, the body of tiie letter was printed, the sig- 
natures only were written. 



8 



ions. I spoke only for mv.^-lf T . ^^^'^^'^^^ ^7 o^^'" opin- 
nrnoH,;.! " -y ;^^ ™yselt. I consulted no one. How then 
came tin. dangerous letter, this -t/mnder clap" publishedr tT 
parses to ^kor. U ... aUresseci tk.nsares ^jt'dTi, with' 
out comment, but M'ithout consulting me at ^11 If ll , ' 
the immediate cause of the a.^re^ni L "^ 

publishers as much in fault as rSe^;'it.TT, ''""'; ^'\ "^* "^^ 
publicitinn Tf, '"'•^ lue Miitei .^ It was not written for 

It as a " demonstration" of 3Ir. Annlef n„ "n- 1 *i 'intense 

its character ? Were they not aw^e Ifit. f "^ "' '"""" 

I have not l.n.vo .u ' dangerous tendency ? 

to Congress by 780,000 persons ; an effect trnlv T it 
contained in faet no other ,alis„,an „t a f« sLlkChf ", ,. 

opm,on I have hel.l throngh good and ^hron "l v , Th„U , ! 

: Id'ti'::;'"""'""'" "-^ ^^-^ ^'^.:^^^^L^x 

«7o T ! n ™''' """^"l-'tanding ,he destrue.iye tanff of 

»™P^.o those .hieh .».ine..ahi>,trrrnr:; 

.ouVre:o:r:tsV;r:r "ir^ ,r r*- 

-h dae, to set this .atter L .s .rS helr^rtde^ 
August 8, 1846. 



NUMBER IV. 
MR. PALFKEY TO MR. APPLETON. 

Boston, Oct. 17th, 1846. 

Sir: 

Your note of the 15th instant, reached me through 
the Boston Post Office, after some little delay, occasioned 
by its being mailed to Cambridge, where I do not send for 

letters. 

I cannot sufficiently express my surprise at the treat- 
ment I receive. You have been for years a leader of the 
Whig Party, of which I have been an humble but a trust- 
ed member. Some of us who last Autumn undertook to 
obtain an expression of the freemen of the Common- 
wealth on the pending measure of the annexation of 
Texas, understood ourselves to be standing precisely on 
the Whig platform, as laid down in the Resolves of a suc- 
cession of Massachusetts Whig Legislatures. It is now 
the opinion of many, that a secession from the ground 
taken in those Pvesolves was determined on, in high quar- 
ters in Boston, as early as the beginning of last Summer. 
As a member of a sub-committee, I signed a large num- 
ber of printed circular letters, intended to be addressed to 
such as, from their past course, might be expected to favor 
the object. The circulars then passed into other hands, 
to be so addressed. To one sent to you, you replied in 
terms understood to indicate a purpose on your part to put 
down the movement, as far as your influence would go, 
by heaping a load of undeserved odium on some of those 
who were conducting it. Your letter was published by the 
Texas State Committee, for reasons which have since been 
set forth in an editorial of the Boston Whig ; which 
reasons appear to me to be very valid and sufficient. I 
had however nothing to do with its publication. In the 
presence of others I heard a part of it read by a gentleman 
in relations of particular friendship with you, and I took 
it to be addressed to him just as another letter on the same 



10 



subject was addressed to Mr Adam, r i 

"s be,„g i„ answer to one of ,t cTreul. s r r," °" °' 
of my having anv Dor.nnM "'""'''"' I had signed, or 

til i. met my ey iHl e n """ '""' '' ^''>«^^". •>"- 

of .he persons Tdd s 717" "'" "^ "=""^ ^ °- 

herore the p,.M,e, s.T^mati ef ^Z;'':: ^f • °*-' 

o-|oode,t.en:tr:ft;;rar:fVrLtr'-^ 

'he hgln. I. pre t taf . T' " "°"" "°' ''^^ ^^^" 
tiser and other Zera-^n'r ''''*'''"' '" '^e Adver- 
.hey e,ren,ated Z^ll^ ^^Z ''Zn^T' 
has gone out over the -lobo T "^^^'^^ 

vin*cat.on. i suhm,: t ■,?:., or X'asTr J't ^'t ^ 

~r yTdTLf : " r "-' -• "°" '-™ ^^^^ 

ietter whfch eon, s t t'" "'™^' " """^'hing in ,he 
circulate the n.s . It J;'' ^° ^° '^'^ ^ '^ -k me to 
your mind. I lianne. el to '^ ™'"™' P'''™^'°" "^ 
ocal was your lan^u,!e H ™T' '" ""'''"^''^ =5"'^- 
stood as meanitt ,°hTh J°" '"'" ''"^ ^^^" ""''"- 

were words that w,/ ""''' ^^""^^'i ''^ ">^ "'"on" 
in using. "^ '"' "^Tre-'y '""'^d you to join „s 

A."rr;r/t:::t:frTi:aV:»^^" '-'-"-- 

cation, and never expected to n!,hr , ''•" '" "'"' '''PP''- 
»»"er, betng "qu.tecomom" ^"^^^"'^"'°"' "'^ 

We my cha'ae.e'r ,rtrha" ds :^ C^J^T' ^'"^ 
course, I was notmsensible to the ,'rdsh n 'r'„ "^ '"^ 
I undertook last summer to f , ^ ""^ '"'^"""■• 
Slave Power to the w". uTf """^ "^^^'^ °» '"« 
when I be<.an thern thn 7 , , ^'^ °°' °""''-^'' '° ■"". 



11 

War," and, " it is to that publication [the publication of 
your letter] that you [Ij attribute such tremendous re- 
sults." Pardon me for asking you to give that paragraph 
a second reading, and to consider whether it sustains your 
remarks. In that number I have spoken of what appeared 
to have been understood at Washington of the secession 
of yourself and others from the ground hitherto occupied 
by the brave Whig party of the North, which party had 
hitherto been the chief agent in keeping a profligate ad- 
ministration in check in its enormous usurpations upon 
right and freedom ; and I have guessed that the adminis- 
tration was emboldened in its bad designs by seeing 
the party which it dreaded thrown into confusion and dis- 
abled in its strong Northern hold. Certainly you do not 
think it incredible that the government should be relieved 
and encouraged in pursuing a favorite policy by seeing 
opposition to it in a formidable quarter enfeebled or aban- 
doned. 

The "demonstration" of yourself and your friends was 
of course too important a part of the history to be passed 
over. It consisted of whatever you and they said and 
did, at that critical time, to discourage and check further 
opposition to the annexation of Texas. Your letter was 
not the " demonstration," but it was the most salient part 
of it known to me, presenting the argument against us in 
the most tangible and explicit form ; and as such I referred 
to and quoted it. You call upon me to print an account 
of the circumstances under which it was published, in or- 
der to shew that I have miscalled it by the name of the 
" demonstration" of which I speak. But I have not called 
it so. On the contrary, I have distinguished between 
them. My language is (No. 9.) '' The demonstration of 
Mr. Appleton and his friends, whejiever and Jiotcever 
else it might have been raade^ was simultaneous with and 
vjas apparently occasioned hy,^^ &c. ; and I then refer to 
your letter as part of that demonstration of yourself and 
those who acted with you. How could I do better? 
These were your sentiments, carefully written out under 



12 

your hand. Referring to that, I was in no danger of mis_ 
representing you. I could not refer to any of your letters 
not before the public. I could not refer to any of your 
conversations, which might have been incorrectly reported. 
When you say, " this [the letter] was my whole action^ 
my whole demonstration," I cannot understand you as in- 
tending to declare that you did not express the same sen- 
timents in other forms. 

You wrote a letter to the Editor of the Whig respect- 
ing my remarks, which he published. You did not see 
lit to address me upon the subject, though I believe it was 
known to you that I was the author of the papers. Pre- 
viously to the publication, the editor asked me if I would 
make any comments upon it. I declined. I did not and 
have not said of it, nor will I, what the Advertiser said of 
the comment of my friend on your first letter, that it v/as 
"too puerile to deserve publication." But I did not attach 
to it any considerable importance. Nor, I was fain to think, 
did you. I have it not now by me. But my recollection 
cannot be in error as to its being light and sportive in its 
tenor and tone, and further, if I remember rightly, in the 
unpublished note with which you accompanied it, you 
expressed yourself to a great degree indifferent whether it 
was published or not, and left it at the disposal of the 
friend to whom it was sent. 

You now ask me " as an act of simple justice" to pub- 
lish it, and by the offensive language with which you ac- 
company the request, you of course decline to put it on 
any other ground. Were there any alleged misstatement 
of a fact, the claim of justice would be good. But such 
is not the case now in hand. I do not perceive that there 
can be any danger of misapprehension of what I have said 
of a demonstration of yourself and your friends. On the 
two occasions on which I have referred to your letter 
(Nos. 9 and 22, pp. 26 and 77 of the pamphlet,) I have 
distinctly said that it was in reply to an application in be- 
half of the Texas Committee to you for aid. So far from 
intimating that you published it, I have not, I think, any- 



13 

where spoken of it as having been published at all. As you 
appear however to attach some importance to the point, I 
will, should the papers come to a second edition, state that 
it was published by the Slate Texas Committee. I may 
also publish your letters, though at present I think I shall 
not do so. In that case I shall of course accompany them 
with this note, or with such other comment as may then 
seem to me to be proper. 

You speak of '-'personalities." I am not aware that I 
have been stung by the bitter personality with which I 
was first assailed, into any transgression of the legitimate 
freedom of discussion of the course of men exerting great 
influence on public affairs. As to unworthy personalities, 
I will try patiently to bear, but I do not intend to deal in 
them. In connexion with my humble name, I have with- 
in a few weeks heard not a few such, with which I am 
told " all State Street rings from side to side." You have 
perhaps seen the Atlas of three or four days ago. Did I 
ever use a personality like that, of any man of any fair 
standing ? But I let it go, " content to leave my charac- 
ter in the hands of the public." 

I do not allow myself to be pained by your overbearing 
language. It is best that we should understand one 
another. I am not to be so overborne. Doubtless in sta- 
tion and influence you have greatly the advantage of me. 
But I, as much as yourself, am a freeman of Massachu- 
setts, in the enjoyment as yet of political privileges, in- 
herited from ancestors who did their full part in winning 
them, and which, please God, I will do my best to se- 
cure for their posterity and mine. Nothing, I think, will 
stay me from doing what I judge I ought to do, in duty 
to them and to my country 

I am sir, your obedient servant. 

JOHN G. PALFREY. 

Hon. N. Appleton. 



14 



NUMBER V. 
MU. APPLETON TO MR. PALFREY. 

Deak Sir : ^"'^°^' ^^^^^ ^cx. 1846. 

Yours of the 1 7th reached me on the 20th in.f 

.a^ r;-:rzsr:;:-- 
f.m>,sh,„g your readers wi.h a co,feet sta.ement'f.T' 
grounds on which that opinion was f^Led ' "' "' 
Your answer of ten pages introduees a number of new 
ssues, some of w,>,oh appear to nre wholly "rre evant I 

m paidon me for passing over very summarrly. 

ieaI™ft:wL^";;;^.'''" "'^'-'^ ^--'oryearsa 
uu >vmgpaity —an assert on howevpr fl^t^o 

known or heard of my interferencl 7T \ . """"" 

consu ted about flinm ^r /> . ' ^^ ^ °^6" 

no. have app^ved "' °"""" ' P-^ably should 

You then refer to mv letter nf Inct m 

were condue.ing the Texas movem m That t::.;: 
"- yourself wUh others, st,gmat.ed hy X^r^ 



15 

imputation under (my) hand of disloyalty to the Union" — 
and that you consider my request to you to publish that 
letter, as asking you "to circulate the insult anew." 

I must be strangely incapable of using language suited 
to convey my meaning or to express my feelings, if there 
is the slighest ground for these charges — I had no idea of 
heaping odium on any one, nor of saying a word disre- 
spectful or offensive to you, or either of the gentlemen 
who sent me the letter which I was answering. My ob- 
liquity of vision continues, and I cannot with all the light 
you throw upon it, perceive how I could, with these feel- 
ings have expressed myself more cautiously and carefully. 

I had lately seen in the book called the " Liberty Bell" 
printed for the Anti-Slavery Fair of 1845, an article in 
which the phrase, " Accursed he the Union " was many 
times repeated in a manner giving me a disgust bordering 
upon horror. 

The name of the writer was attached to it, and I ob- 
served that name amongst the signers of the address which 
1 was asked to furnish funds to circulate, together with 
those of many others, who from their connection with 
that Society, I had reason to suppose approved of that 
sentiment. It was in reference to this circumstance that 
after having referred to the political action of the "Aboli- 
tion party " I used the folloAving language. " I cannot 
sympathise with their cry of ' accursed be the Union,' 
and I cannot but regret some of the sentiments contained 
in the documents enclosed to me. I cannot furnish funds 
to aid in their circulation." 

How you can construe this as casting "undeserved odi- 
um" on those whose own sentiment I quoted in their own 
words, or as imputing "disloyalty to the Union" to your- 
self, is past my comprehension — I did not then believe, 
nor did I intimate, that you and some others whose names 
I regretted to see attached to that address, did sympathise 
with that cry — But I thought the following expression 
came somewhat too near it for me — " Be it that the 
United States Constitution nullifies our consciences and 



16 

religion,''^ — which certainly to me sounds rather odd from 
the lips of those who liave sworn to support that Consti- 
ution. Neither as matter of fact or of taste could I assist in 
circulating the following — " Remember the Bowie Knife 
horrors between the whites themselves with which the whole 
South teems.'^ These quotations are only samples. I am 
bound in charity to believe, as I certainly hope, that some 
of those who sianed that address did so without reading it. 

You seem desirous, by violent special pleading, to avoid 
the application of your expression, " the demonstration of 
Mr. Appleton and his friends" to the simple fact of the 
publication of that letter, made by yourself and your asso- 
ciates. 

You intimate that I might have said the same thing in 
conversation, and that the letter might have seen the 
light through my agency. I do not perceive the perti- 
nency of these suggestions, but for your satisfaction will 
assure you that I never had the slightest idea of publish- 
ing it myself I never had any agency in its republica- 
tion or circulation. And I have no recollection, in the 
numerous instances in which it was mentioned to me, of 
ever being called on to make any explanationof it. Cer- 
tainly, I never heard of its casting any unjust imputation 
on any one. I wish you at the same time to understand 
that I never made any complaint on account of its publica- 
tion. It was unexpected to me, but I never complained of it. 

You refer to my letter to the Editor of the Whig, and 
would seem to imply, that it ought to have been addressed 
to yourself. I should have thought it indelicate to do so 
as your article was anonymous, even had I not considered 
the intimation made to me, of its authorship, private. 

It is true that letter was written in perfect good humor 
and I make no objection to the character you give it, as 
" light and sportive in its tenor and tone." At the time 
I wrote it, I had not seen your No. 11, and was not aware 
of the tremendous personal consequences which you de- 
duced from my letter of November. 

Our social relations had always been friendly. On 



17 



readin- that number I found myself fallen very low m 
your esteem. Regret it as I might, of this I had no 
right to complain-but I thought it somewhat unkuid to 
publish it to the world. I regretted on your own account 
tlie comments with which you thought proper to accom- 
pany this annunciation in your original publication, and 
fn its amended form, I cannot but think the expression 
uMr Appleton's position is not favorable to elevated 
views of public policy," any thing but complimentary to 
the whole mercantile community, as embraced m the same 

category. ^ . . r 

The insinuation of unfairness in my Examination of 
Mr. Walker's Revenue Standard is as unjust as it was un- 
called for. ^ ... 

I find some palliation for all this, in the fact which you 
now communicate to me, that you had felt yourself sUmg 
bv what you term " Miter personality- in my first let- 
ter-the venom of which must have been rankling m 
your bosom for nine months. I confess the knowledge of 
this fact is some relief to me, for notwithstanding my ina- 
bility to imagine the mental process by which that feel- 
ing was produced, from language so perfectly harmless as 
mine, it furnishes a motive for conduct which was pre- 
viously to me wholly inexplicable. You had introduced 
rpy name into your pamphlet, I should think at least 
twenty times, and always disparagingly. It appeared to 
me the most truly spontaneous and gratuitous ebullition of 
ill nature which had ever fallen within the circle of my 

observation. , 

■ I cannot answer for your grievances with the Adver- 
tiser, Atlas, or State Street. I have no control over either 
of them. But I may be permitted to inqmre what jou 
mean by attributing to me -overbearing language? 1 
challenge you to point out any sentence, word or syllable 
of mine to which that epithet will apply. I commend 
your determination not to be overborne. It is a worthy 
sentiment, but should always be accompanied by the de- 
termination to avoid injustice to others. 



18 

I shall not repeat my request to you to print my letters. 
It is my intention to publish the whole correspondence. 
This will do justice to us both. 

I am sir, 

Your very ob't serv't, 

N. APPLETON. 
John G. Palfrey, Es^. 



APPENDIX. 



From the Liberty Bell of 1845. 
Extracts from " The American Union," by William Lloyd Garrison. 

" Accursed be the American Union, as a stupendous republi- 
can imposture ! 

" Accursed be it, as tbe most frightful despotism, with regard to 
three millions of the people ever exercised over any portion of the 
human family ! 

" Accursed be it, as the most subtle and atrocious compromise 
ever made to gratify power and selfishness ! 

" Accursed be it as a Ubel on Democracy, and a bold assault on 
Christianity ! 

" Accursed be it as stained with human blood, and supported by 
human sacrifices ! 

" Accursed be it for the terrible evils it has inflicted on Africa, 
by burning her villages, ravaging her coast, and kidnapping her 
children, at an enonnous expense of human life, and for a diaboli- 
cal purpose ! 

" Accursed be it for aU the crimes it has committed at home— 
for seeking the utter extermination of the red men of its wildei*- 
nesses, and for enslaving one sixth part of its teeming population ! 

" Accursed be it, for its hypocrisy, its falsehood, its impudence, 
its lust, its cruelty, its oppression ! 

" Accursed be it, as a mighty obstacle in the way of universal 
freedom and equality ! 

'• Accursed be it, from the foundation to the roof, and may there 
soon not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown 
down! 

" Henceforth the watchword of every uncompromising abohtion- 
ist, of every friend of God and liberty, must be, both in a religious 
and political sense — 'no union with slaveholders!" 



\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



20 



Extracts from " The National Compac 



011 899 538 7 



" The Constitution of the United States, both in theory and prac- 
tice, is so utterly broken down by the influence and effects of 
slavery, so imbecile for the highest good of the nation, and so 
powerful for evil, that I can give no Aoluutary assistance in hold- 
ing it up any longer. 

" Henceforth it is dead to me and I to it. I withdraw all pro- 
fession of allegiance to it, and all my voluntary efforts to sustain it. 

Extracts from "The Constitution," by Wendell Phillips. 

" Now the Constitution of the United States is either anti-sla- 
very or pro-slavery in its character. If the latter, if it binds us to 
sustain slavery in any degree, then surely it is ' a covenant with 
death and an agreement with hell/ and ought to be immediately 
annulled. No abolitionist can take office under it or swear to sup- 
port it." 

" If on the other hand it is an anti-slavery instrimaent then union 
itself is impossible without guilt. * * * 

There is no course left for honest men but to join in the battle 
cry of the American Anti-Slavery Society. 

'•No Union with Slave Holders." 

These gentlemen were all signers to the address, for the circu- 
lation of which, funds were asked. 



\ 



1 



J 

M«,^.f,M,?''^ Of" CONGRESS 



011 899 538 7 



pemrulrfe* 

pH8^ 



